Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Boyd

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 15, 1976No. 752PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAN der VOORT, Judge:

Appellant was tried before a judge and jury on a charge of forcible rape. He was convicted. He became a fugitive and his post-trial motions were dismissed because the appellant had absconded. Approximately sixteen (16) months later he returned and petitioned the court.to consider the post-trial motions nunc pro tunc. This petition was refused and a sentence of 4 to 8 years was imposed, from which appellant took this appeal. The sole question is whether or not the trial court acted properly in dismissing the post-trial motions and refusing to reinstate and reconsider them…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Estelle v. DorroughSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Smith v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  3. Allen v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  4. State v. ScottSupreme Court of Kansas · 1905
  5. Commonwealth v. CareySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Gary Lee Doctor v. Gilbert A. WaltersCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
  2. Commonwealth v. HarrisonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Commonwealth v. AlbertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. In the Interest of J.J.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. George Feigley, A/K/A George Stoctay v. Thomas Fulcomer, Superintendent, and Leroy Zimmerman, Attorney GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API